Intellectual Property Law

But on the other hand ?.

By Lee Gesmer

In contast to the Suffolk Business Litigation noncompete cases discussed below, in National Engineering v. Grogan Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Maureen B. Hogan, sitting in Middlesex County,  enforced a six month noncompete provision between a recruiting and staffing firm, and its former employee, Travis Grogan.

The heart of Judge Hogan’s decision is as follows:

Other than his employment at NESC, had no experience in the staffing industry. All of his knowledge of the business was gained through training provided by NESC and by working at NESC. His relationships with the customers and accounts of NESC were all developed and maintained while he was employed at NESC, through use of the resources and confidential information of NESC. The success of NESC’s business is grounded upon relationships and good will with its corporate customers and Managed Service Providers, developed through its sales executives, such as Grogan. NESC is entitled to protect its good will and relationships with its customers and accounts through the non-compete covenants to which agreed. These covenants restrict from engaging in competition with NESC and from soliciting and/or servicing its clients and accounts for a reasonable period of time-one year. The general non-competition covenant which restricts from working for a competitor within 50 miles of the office or area in which he worked while at NESC is also reasonable in scope. These covenants do not restrict from using his own skills, knowledge or talent, but rather prevent him from trading on the good will of NESC by restricting him from using the relationships he developed with NESC’s customers, clients and accounts and the confidential information of NESC, including knowledge of these customers and their needs.

Would this case have been decided differently in the Suffolk BLS? One wonders ….

A link to the full case is here.

Full post as published by Mass Law Blog on March 12, 2008 (boomark / email).